Turn a client requirement into a comparable WMS demo: follow one receipt through stock holds, allocation and approval, and record what each supplier demonstrates.
When comparing warehouse management systems for a 3PL, give each shortlisted supplier the same client workflow to demonstrate. Agree what should happen before the demo, then follow the work from the warehouse user’s first action to the result the next person relies on.
A feature name leaves much of the process unspecified. A system might let someone mark stock as held. You still need to see whether that prevents allocation, how the stock is released and what the client sees while it waits.
The checklist below uses goods receiving to show how to build a useful test. Apply the method to the client workflows that matter in your warehouse, alongside the ordinary receiving, storage, picking and dispatch work your WMS must cover.
Prepare the test before the meeting
Choose a requirement with a clear reason behind it, such as a client’s agreement about when received stock becomes available. Check that the reason still holds. Reproducing an approval nobody needs will make the new process harder to run.
Send the supplier a short description of the work, safe sample data and the expected outcome. Include the people who will use the system: a receiver should be able to judge the receiving steps, while the person handling client enquiries checks whether the resulting stock view answers their questions.
Ask the supplier to identify what they have prepared for the demonstration. A standard feature, configuration made for your test and proposed development are useful but different evidence. A slide describing future behaviour should stay marked as proposed until someone can run it.
Follow one receipt into available stock
Use this illustrative test: client A sends 100 units of one product. Eight need inspection because their packaging is damaged. The client’s rule allows the other 92 units to become available while those eight remain on hold. Assume there is no other stock, no existing reservations and no other restriction on availability.
Have the receiver process the delivery. Watch how they identify the client and product, record the count and separate the eight held units. Check whether the next person can find those units and understand why they are waiting. If someone has to copy a note into another system, record that step too.
Now try to allocate an order for 95 units. Under the agreed rule, only 92 are eligible, leaving a shortage of three. The eight held units are still in the warehouse, so a view of physical stock should account for all 100. A view of available stock should explain why only 92 can be used. Ask the supplier to show both and trace them back to the receipt.
A hold recorded on a screen has fulfilled the requirement only if the allocation process respects it and colleagues can understand the resulting quantities.
Run a second client’s rule
For client B, use a separate receipt of 100 undamaged units. This client’s agreement requires a designated person to approve every receipt before any stock becomes available. Before approval, the test should show 100 physically received and zero available. After that person approves the full receipt, all 100 become available, assuming the same absence of other restrictions.
Watch how the receiver finishes their part and how the approver finds the work waiting for them. Then inspect the release record. Can another colleague see who approved it and which receipt they approved? Check client A again: its eight damaged units should still be held.
The second run tests more than changing a customer name. It shows whether a different client agreement changes the work people receive and the conditions under which stock can move forward.
Keep an evidence sheet while you watch
Use a row for each requirement. Record what you observed and any manual step needed to obtain the result.
Requirement | Evidence to capture | If it is unfinished |
|---|---|---|
Receiver records usable and held quantities | Steps performed, resulting quantities and receipt reference | Identify missing configuration or development |
Allocation excludes held stock | Result of the 95-unit order test | Agree the rule to implement and a date to rerun it |
Client B requires approval | Pending work, permitted approver and release result | Identify how the approval process will be delivered |
Colleagues can explain the stock position | Physical, held and available quantities traced to the receipt | Record any report or manual reconciliation still needed |
After the main walkthrough, correct a receiving count and inspect the resulting stock position. Have the supplier show how the correction remains understandable. Then introduce one realistic change to a client rule, such as allowing a different role to approve receipt. Establish who makes the change, how it is tested and what happens to work already waiting for approval. Keep proposed answers separate from behaviour you have seen.
A demo will not establish peak throughput or prove every recovery path. Record those as follow-up tests where they matter. Use the evidence sheet with your wider assessment of warehouse coverage, integrations and implementation responsibilities; the WMS selection guide covers that comparison.
Testing a workflow implemented in Keel
Keel is an operations platform for shaping the work your team does, including how receiving leads to review and stock release. In this example, an implementation could give receivers the steps needed for each client’s delivery and give approvers a view of receipts awaiting their decision. The release action would apply the agreed conditions before changing which stock is available.
Keel’s flows connect steps that gather input from people with processing steps. Custom business logic expresses the rules behind the work. That lets the implementation change the approval process and its release conditions together. The receipt workflow and stock rules described here would need to be implemented and tested for your operation; they are not a prebuilt 3PL module.
Keel’s team leads that implementation, with testing and handover agreed as part of the project. If an existing WMS demonstrates the process well and meets your wider requirements, it may already give you what you need. Where your evaluation leaves a material gap, bring the test and your evidence sheet to a conversation with us. Discuss your warehouse requirements.
